 Flashman14  | 02 Dec 2015 6:44 a.m. PST |
What's more valuable:
A. An inventory of the contents, description of mechanisms, quality of paper, an out of the box review.
B. The above, maybe abreviated, but written with evidence of having actually played it. What does the reviewer like/dislike about outcomes of real games. Is it fun? I see way too many of the former and rarely the latter, so there, my biases on full display. |
 etotheipi  | 02 Dec 2015 6:59 a.m. PST |
What does the reviewer like/dislike about outcomes of real games. A review of the player experience after enough play to become "smooth", touching items like:
* where you focused attention
* how often you (collectively) had to look things up & why
* flow of game over the entire scenario
* how your situational awareness evolved over time
* how your command of your objective evolved over time
* what decisions you faced These are the things I try to focus on when describing a game to others. |
| KTravlos | 02 Dec 2015 7:04 a.m. PST |
I tend to try and combine my rules review with either a solo or strategic playtest. |
| MajorB | 02 Dec 2015 7:23 a.m. PST |
What is a "strategic playtest"? |
| nazrat | 02 Dec 2015 7:46 a.m. PST |
If the reviewer hasn't played the game the review is essentially useless to me. |
| Weasel | 02 Dec 2015 8:26 a.m. PST |
I'll read either, just put in the review whether its from reading or playing. |
| Badgers | 02 Dec 2015 8:55 a.m. PST |
|
| Rrobbyrobot | 02 Dec 2015 9:13 a.m. PST |
|
 Herkybird | 02 Dec 2015 11:09 a.m. PST |
I agree with Rrobbyrobot, who agrees with Badgers! |
| Rich Bliss | 02 Dec 2015 11:15 a.m. PST |
Definitely B. A (Thinglum Style) doesn't help me much at all. |
| John Armatys | 02 Dec 2015 11:22 a.m. PST |
I agree with Rich Bliss. I'd also like to see how long the game took, how many players were involved and what problems with the rules were encountered. |
| Dynaman8789 | 02 Dec 2015 11:52 a.m. PST |
Since I don't pay for reviews other then network access costs I'll take any review I can get. |
| Phrodon | 02 Dec 2015 1:27 p.m. PST |
I had my RPG reviewed several years ago by a fellow who had never played the game. He complained how this mechanic and that mechanic would never work, etc. Yet had never played the game, only read the rules. The review really bothered me. To me it was like reviewing music without listening to it. I would prefer B (overview and a review based on game play). But would take A (simply an overview) rather than a C (No overview, and a never played but will review the game anyway). |
 The Virtual Armchair General | 02 Dec 2015 1:33 p.m. PST |
I agree with Herkybird who agrees with Rrobbyrobot, who agrees with Badgers! TVAG |
 miniMo | 02 Dec 2015 1:36 p.m. PST |
A description is not a review. Heck, it wouldn't even get you a passing grade as a book report! |
| KTravlos | 03 Dec 2015 3:03 p.m. PST |
"strategic"= with a live opponent. Sorry IR talk got the better of me (in Poli Sci situation is strategic if it entails interaction with an active opposition that reciprocates actions and adjusts to changing circumstances) |
